N.Z. UNIVERSITY SENATE

Auckland Star, Volume XXXII, Issue 48, 26 February 1901, Page 5

N.Z. UNIVERSITY SENATE

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

'flue- Senate of the New Zealand University met again this morning at Government House, the Chancellor (Sir James Hector) presiding. The other members present were:—The Vice-Chancellor (Rev. J. Andrew),! Rev. J. Patterson, Sir G. M. O'Rorke, j Dr. Salmond, Hon. VV. Rolleston, Mr Hay, Mr L. Cohen, Dr. Fitchett, Sir •lames Prendergast, Prof. Cook, Prof. Sale, Professor A. P. Thomas, Prof. F. D. Brown, and Dr. Scott. MACMILLAN-BROWN ESSAY. The Chancellor stated that he had appointed Dr. Fitchett to act with Professor MacKenzie and Mr Louis Cohen as examiner for the MacMillanBrown prize essay, the result of which competition for 1901 will be made known during this session of the Senate. JUNIOR SCHOLARS. Professor Cook moved: "That all junior scholars will be expected to devote their whole time to University work, and any junior scholar accepting a salaried appointment shall thereby vacate his or her junior scholarship." Prof. Cook said this question was brought up by him on .account of several facts which had come before the finance committee. It was never intended that the scholarships should be mere prizes, but that they should be incentives and aids to future work. They found, however, that many University scholars accepted appointments of one kind or another. The abuse ■was becoming ;. ferious one. Students took positions in the civil service as teachers, and they therefore could not do much in the way of gaining the purpose for which the scholarships were intended. Students should not take positions outside which called for the greater part of their time and energy. Prof. Sale seconded the motion. I Professor Brown supported the moiion, and said there was a growing abuse in this matter. There was too great a tendency to look on the money aspect of the question. Howcould a Professorial Board consistently say that these scholars must attend lectures and classes for 14 hours a week, which involved many more hours of additional work, while the Senate allowed them to do 40 or. 50 hours a week work for the Government or in a lawyer's office or somewhere else? He thought there should be a. reform in this matter.

Sir G. M. O'Rorke hoped the Senate would not pass so drastic a resolution. If there were abuses, the Senate could rectify them, but the proposal of Professor Cook would press xery hardly on those scholars whose parents were, not rich people.

Mr L. Cohen supported the motion, and said the object of this was to prevent a spurious leisured class coming and taking the place in the University of really deserving scholars. The only w.y .b stop an abuse was to declare it an I'buse, and he thought it was quite right that Prof. Cook should havo. conic here and brought forward this motion. The junior scholarship wa.s a. system which demanded the devotion of the whole physical and mental powers of the scholars to the work of the University. It was impossible for scholars to hold positions outside the University, and at the same time properly pursue their studies.

Hi*. Salmond said he would like something more definite in the motion in the place of the words "salaried appointment." He was not prepared to exclude school teachers, civil servants, or clerks in lawyers' offices. Ihey needed the money to support, them in their University course. He was not prepared to vote for the motion in its present form.

Si? James Prendergast opposed the motion. He considered it would lead to all so_U of subterfuges on the part of scholars.

Professor Cook said the question was whether they should pay for the kind of work that scholars were able to give when they were engaged in outside occupations. It was the talent of the country the Senate sought to encourage, but if the scholars were allowed to engage in the civil service and other employment, it was diverting money improperly to make payments to then from the funds of the University. It could not be denied that the present state of affairs was a great abuse. They could not get that good work out of the best students which they had the right to expect if the scholars were occupied in outside work. It was not intended to interfere 'with what the students did in their recess. The Christchurch University College had given serious attention to this matter, and it looked for a lead to be given by the Senate on the question.

The question then went to division. The division list Avas as follows: — Ayes: Mr Cohen, Prof. Cook, Prof. Sale, Prof. Shand, Dr. Scott, Prof. Thomas, Prof. Brown and the Chancellor. Noes: Dr. Fitchett, Mr Hay, Sir G. M. O'Rorke, Dr. Salmond, Rev. J. Patterson, Sir James Prendergast, the Hon. W. Rolleston, and the ViceChan eel lor.

The voting being equal (eight for and eight against), the Chancellor gave his easting vote, which was in favour of the motion. The resolution was therefore carried.

Prof. Cook also moved, and it was resolved, "That when a junior scholar claims the additional payment at the rate of £20 a year, on the ground, of being obliged to live away from home in order to attend a University College, such payment shall not be made unless the Chairman of the Professorial Board of the College to which such scholar belongs shall certify that the scholar is entitled to such payrpent." FRENCH. Prof. Salmond moved, and it was resolved, "That it be remitted to the Committee on Authors and Periods to prepare a new definition of French for junior scholarship, in agreement with resolution of Senate separating the papers in that subject for matriculation." FINANCE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. The Senate then proceeded to the consideration of the Finance Committee's report, a synopsis of which was published yesterday.'

Prof. Cook moved that the accounts be adopted, and that, in accordance with the recommendation of the committee fifteen junior scholarships be offered for competition in December, 1901.

Sir Maurice O'Rorke said it would be

a very desirable thing to establish two additional scholarships, one in medicine and another in law. The accumulated funds of the scholarship account now stood at £15,000, and a sum of £ 100 could very well be set apart, for these two additional scholarships. However, he would not press the point if the Finance Committee had good reasons for not supporting it. Professor Cook said he did not think it would be prudent to increase the number of scholarships. Their income this year was £ 10 below that of last year, and if the senior scholarships were filled up there would be still less money available. They were offering as many scholarships as the funds could afford. Professor Thomas pointed to the surplus of £445 estimated for 1901 in connection with the scholarship account, and considered the Senate could very well afford to establish the proposed new scholarships. Professor Cook's motions were agreed to, and the Finance Committee's report was adopted. THE LAW EXAMINATIONS. Sir James Prendergast presented the following interim report of the Law Committee, which was adopted: — The Law Committee beg to report as follows: (1) That they have considered the cases of Candidates A, B, and C, wliich were referred to them. In the case of Candidate A the examiner in real and personal property reports that a clerical error was made in his return of the candidate's marks. On the necessary correction being made the candidate is entitled to a pass for the final solicitors' law examination. The committee therefore recommend that his name, J. G. Stevens, be added to list of those reported by the Recess Committee as having passed that examination. In the ease- of Candidates B and 0 the Committee have no recommendation to make. (2) That having regard to the confusion which has arisen by reason of examiners returning candidates as having passed conditionally the Committee recommend that in future the law examiners be instructed to report candidates as having "passed" or failed," the number of marks obtained being also given, (.'j) That the Committee have considered a number of suggestions submitted

with reference to the LL.B. and law professional examinations, and make the following recommendations: (a) 'That section V. of the LL.B. Statute be amended by substituting contracts and torts, real and personal property and equity for contracts and. torts and practice and procedure, and by allowing candidates to take any one or t\vo of the first mentioned three :|ubje_.s at the second examination instead of at the third examination. (I.) That the following proviso be added to section I. of the LL.B. Statute: "Provided that in the ca.se of candidates for the LL.B. degree who are desirous of qualifying to practise as'barristers or solicitors the examination described in the Statute as the 'third' examination may be taken before either or both of the other examinations." .(4) That the Committee have considered the suggestion that the law professional examinations be held twice in each year. A similar proposal was before the Senate in 189S, and was referred to the Finance Committee of that year. That Committee reported that the University sustains a heavy loss annually on the professional examinations in law, that the fees for these examinations have been fixed on so low a. scale that they do not cover half the cost of the examination, and that the loss to the University becomes greater year by year as the number of candidates increases. The fees for the law professional examinations are fixed by the Law Practitioners Act and cannot be increased by the Senate. The Committee therefore consider that on tje ground of expense it is impossible to hold the law professional examinations more frequentl;yj:.ha.n once a year. (5) That they recommend that the action of the Chancellor in appointing and convening the Recess Law Committee be ratified, and that the report of that Committee be adopted with the addition referred to in the first, paragraph of this report. The Committee also recommend that the present Law Committee be appointed to act as a, Pecess Committee.

In connection with the law examinations, the Chancellor has been empowered to confer the necessary degrees on the following, .who passed the final examination for the degree of LL.B., on the payment of the fees; S. A. Atkinson (8.A.), H. D. Bamford (8.A.), J. Glasgow, E. F.G. Johansen (8.A.), C. E. MacKav (8.A.), R. Moore (M.A.), W. L. Moore, L. E. Williams (M.A.)

' The rest of to-day's sitting was taken up with committee work. The Senate will sit again to-morrow*.